3 ms·
This makes Unix's orthogonality really clear. I'm fascinated the system was still able to run after taking that kind of a hit. Imagine what would happen to WInd
by djacobs 16y ago
This makes Unix's orthogonality really clear. I'm fascinated the system was still able to run after taking that kind of a hit. Imagine what would happen to WIndows (immediately) if half the system (including key system binaries) were destroyed.
- jodrellblank 16y agoI'm going to guess, if they're in use you wont be allowed to delete them, and then you'd be in a similar situation - things like notepad would be missing, various programs wont start due to missing dependencies. In fact, we can see from Youtube: Ubuntu: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4fzInlyYQo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4fzInlyYQo Windows XP: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aSo8-VDS8E http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aSo8-VDS8E XP appears to hold up slightly better - it doesn't ruin the fonts, and it pops up a System File Protection dialog indicating it has noticed the broken system files and asking for an install CD to recover them from.
- djacobs 16y agoMy overall point is that Windows (in my experience) breaks at the slightest registry change or missing DLL or config file. Linux/Unix try to be as loosely coupled as possible, which means you can still run your in-memory gnuemacs (as in the article) even when your /bin directory (presumably with supporting binaries for emacs) gets wiped out. That kind of design takes a lot of thought and, as far as I know, doesn't hold true in DOS/Windows.